.@vestager responds to the court defeat in Illumina/Grail today.
She notes:
- EC will continue to accept Art 22 referrals (when NCAs have jurisdiction)
- Some NCAs have in the meantime developed call-in powers & so great chances to review such deals
https://t.co/ebgtTL0gX3
@Martinned81@PGunigantiAT@EUTelecoms Re-emerging briefly here as these discussions aren’t yet happening in the other place.
Yes there’s an obvious distinction between nascent acquisitions and killer acquisitions. The two may overlap though it’s not the case here.
As Martin says, I fear the naming battle is lost.
The whole tax debate needs reframing. He’s trying to take 4bn away from schools, hospitals, the emergency services. Talking about “tax” without talking about services the government provides distorts the debate.
First (but definitely not last!) piece I co-author with my @UofGLaw colleague @davidmreader.
"Taking aim at innovation-crushing mergers: a killer instinct unleashed?" now available in early access in Yearbook of European Law.
Any competition / antitrust folk out there who’d like an invite to the other social network where the skies are bluer, let me know. I have some invite codes. For followers only; dm me.
@SpinningHugo Tax law expert @delaFeriaR has made several posts commenting to a similar effect; and that IHT is unpopular across countries and systems suggesting the unpopularity is not tied to particular rates etc.
Any competition / antitrust folk out there who’d like an invite to the other social network where the skies are bluer, let me know. I have some invite codes. For followers only; dm me.
Any competition / antitrust folk out there who’d like an invite to the other social network where the skies are bluer, let me know. I have some invite codes. For followers only; dm me.
Any competition / antitrust folk out there who’d like an invite to the other social network where the skies are bluer, let me know. I have some invite codes. For followers only; dm me.
@CompetitionProf@Sherman1890 Ha. Yes I am (and no need to apologise). But I’d generalise predatory conduct to profit sacrifice and exclusion of which the cost test is just the main example.
@Sherman1890@CompetitionProf A cost-based element is important but can’t be the whole test. If it is the whole test you’re led into the nonsense of asking - as the EU’s General Court did in Intel - what happens if Intel failed the test in January, March and April but passed in February?
@CompetitionProf@Sherman1890 I think the test is Chicagoan in that it’s overly price-fixated and, if it’s a test of legality, overly generous to incumbents.
Completely agreed on administrability.
@CompetitionProf@Sherman1890 I think the pushback is because people tend - wrongly - to think of predation as market-wide rather than potentially strategic and targeted. I think your position is the better one.